Example #2 Educational Research

Page 1

Structured Summary

Note about reference to dates in this example:
·  In your individual prototype absolute dates should be used (e.g., 2002-2005).
Larry Young, Ph.D., Basic Science Department
Personal Statement
Personal
Goals / ·  To leave everything that I touch better than I found it
·  To use my aptitude to select program areas where I can impact and improve medical education through the application of my analytical and investigative strengths
Personal Preparation / ·  I am a graduate of the Baylor Master Teachers’ Fellowship.
·  I have taken 3 semester long courses in educational research offered by the University of Houston, College of Education
·  I have in-depth curriculum experience as Baylor’s CurrMIT (national Curriculum Database) Developer and Director, and
·  Strong educational involvement at a national level through the AAMC
Personal Reflection/
Process for Improvement / ·  I believe that good research, including educational research, is a collaborative process. Therefore, I always seek advice for research ideas from colleagues before beginning a research effort.
·  I also attempt to refine my research with every successful effort.
Research Effort
Theme: Medical School Curriculum1.  Will students completing a problem-based, cancer prevention elective have higher retention of cancer prevention topics than students just completing the required medical school curriculum? How many students will avail themselves of such an elective, given their existing workload?
2.  Will allied health and medical students completing the same course score equally well on a national board self exam?
3.  Given the variability in instructional activities in clinical clerkships, can the content associated with the activities be adequately captured in a data-base primarily designed for the preclinical curriculum?
4.  Will students in an introduction to clinical medicine course for first-year students perform as well on end-of-course assessments as did students in the old course for second-year students?
5.  Will performance be influenced by the specialty of the students’ clinical preceptor?
Contributions to the Dissemination of the Research Results of Other Investigators
1.  Reviewer, Academic Medicine, Year1-Year4.
2.  Chairman, AAMC Southern Group on Education Affairs, Year1-Year3.
3.  Special Interest Group (SIG) Chairman, Professional Education, American Educational Research Association (AERA) meeting, Chicago, Year1.
Discussion of Breadth
All of my research effort has been in the area of undergraduate medical education in both the pre-clinical and the clinical curriculums. I have also been involved in studies which involve allied health education.

Personal Statement

Larry Young, Ph.D., Basic Science Department

1. Goals - It is my goal to impact the quality of medical education by using sound research practices to answer critical educational questions. My personal quest for self-discovery has led me to the conclusion that I have natural aptitudes and strong interests in all of the steps that lead to improved educational practices and offerings, i.e., better organization, sound program design and improved communication. It has truly become my goal to let these aptitudes guide me as I select program areas where I can impact and improve medical education. It is my goal to achieve this through the application of my analytical and investigative strengths. Evaluating a course or program and making it better or starting from scratch and creating something entirely new that meets a defined need, are the challenges that have served as the basis for my educational research and development interests.

2. Personal Preparation - After receiving a Ph.D. in biochemistry from the University of Cincinnati and postdoctoral training in cancer biology at Baylor College of Medicine, I joined the faculty of Baylor College of Medicine. While I began to lecture in the basic medical pharmacology course early in my career and assume responsibility for the guidance of my department’s offerings for the College’s allied health programs, it was my role as course coordinator for the department’s basic science course for medical students and my membership on the Medical Admissions Committee that were key factors that led me to shift my career emphasis from scientific investigation to medical education and educational research.

Clearly, one of the key experiences in my development as an educator, and in expanding both my knowledge and my educational horizons, was my participation in and completion of Baylor College of Medicine’s Master Teachers’ Fellowship Program. Through this ‘hands on’, survey style program I was formally introduced to the areas of educational psychology, small group learning methods, testing theory, use of technology in the support of education, development and use of assessment tools, as well as many other useful topics. When one couples the opportunity of the Master Teachers’ Fellowship Program with the willingness of Baylor College of Medicine to let energetic and interested people involve themselves and have major responsibilities within the educational enterprise, you have a formula for involvement and for success.

3. Ongoing Self-reflection - While training as a basic scientist was certainly a sufficient preparation for the discipline-based side of medical education, it was a combination of the following experiences that contributed to my current medical education research interests: 1) a key leadership role in Baylor’s Year1 curriculum revision process (Oversight Committee), 2) initiation of a curriculum database program, 3) assuming the director’s position for longitudinal course for medical students, and 4) completion of Baylor’s Master Teachers’ Fellowship Program (Year1).

As a course director, I have tried to create an environment that fosters innovation and creativity within a medical education program. As a result, the course served as the basis for a successful National Board of Medical Examiner’s grant application, an ‘In Progress’ publication in Academic Medicine, and two RIME abstracts that were presented at a recent AAMC meeting. We have continued to innovate through the development of a course strategic plan, plans for an advanced facilitator training program, and introduction of new cases into our course that focus on team building exercises.


Structured Abstract

Larry Young, Ph.D., Basic Science Department

Theme: Medical School Curriculum

Research Question 1: Will students completing a problem-based, cancer prevention elective have higher retention of cancer prevention topics than students just completing the required medical school curriculum? How many students will avail themselves of such an elective, given their existing workload?

Investigation: (Year1–Year5) This research effort was undertaken to increase medical student’s knowledge of cancer prevention because the required curriculum was found to lack sufficient breadth and depth of information on the topic.

Support: National Institutes of Health, CA77407 (R25), “Putting Cancer Prevention into Medical Education Practice”. Principal Investigator: L.C. Young, Ph.D. ($384,378 total direct costs for 3 years; 25% effort), April 1, Year1 – March 31, Year5.

Methods: A ‘modular’ cancer prevention course was developed (2/3 PBL and 1/3 lecture) around the 7 most common forms of cancer and offered to cohorts of 40 second-year medical students over a period of 3 years. Participant cohorts and randomly selected control groups were assessed for their retention of cancer prevention knowledge one month after the last day of the elective.

Results & the Impact of Findings: Question 1: Thirty students completing the elective had significantly higher scores on the knowledge assessment than students in the control group (p<.05). Question 2: After a one-year pilot/evaluation, the elective was approved and offered annually. A total of ~120 medical students have completed the elective.

Contributorship:

·  Larry Young, PhD., PI, Grant Writer, Course Director, ECS Site construction, CATCHUM

·  Lawrence Lang, Ed.D. Co-PI, Course faculty, interventions, educational consultant

·  Andy Watters, Ph.D. Co-Investigator, course faculty.

Dissemination 1: Three interim grant reports were written and submitted to NIH in Year1, Year2, and Year3. These reports were disseminated by NIH to all medical schools via both a web site and a written document.

Dissemination 2: Presentation of preliminary results at the AAMC annual meeting, Chicago, Illinois, Fall Year1.

Research Question 2: Will allied health and medical students completing the same course score equally well on a National Board Self Exam?

Investigation: (Year1) It was recognized that my department had National Board Shelf Examination data for allied health and medical students who had attended the same course lectures over a period of five years. A comparison of these two cohorts in terms of their standardized test performance would help us decide on the: 1) suitability of the course for both student groups and 2) feasibility of awarding grades based on a single grading curve.

Methods: National Board Shelf Examination data was collected for Year1 through Year6, for both physician assistant and medical student cohorts and compared.

Results & the Impact of Findings: The performance range of the top half of the PA class was coincident with the lower half of the medical class. As a consequence, it was decided that the course designed for medical students was a reasonable experience for the PA students, but that a separate grading curve for each cohort was needed.

Contributorship:

·  Paul Andrews, MD, designed the project and wrote the paper

·  Cathy Fossey, PA, provided questions and served as editor

·  Larry Young, MD, PhD, was involved with data collection, data analysis, graphs, and as editor

Dissemination 1: Citation: Andrews, P.L., Fossey, C.E. and Young, L.C. (Year1) Interdisciplinary Learning in Pharmacology: A five year retrospective analysis of MD and PA performance. Medical Education 56: 757-761.

Research Question 3: Given the variability in instructional activities in clinical clerkships, can the content associated with the activities be adequately captured in a database primarily designed for the preclinical curriculum?

Investigation: (Year1) Unlike courses in the preclinical curriculum, clinical clerkships provide instruction in non-classroom based instructional settings, involving a variety of patient- centered, hands-on experiences that are both mentored and independently experienced. This effort was undertaken to identify a way in which to account for clerkship time in terms of learning objectives.

Methods: Interviews with three clerkship directors were conducted to identify the degree of information available about the learning objectives of all possible instructional activities, including those centered on patient care. Based on the interview results, a method for representing this information in the database was developed and pilot-tested.

Results & the Impact of Findings: Learning objectives tend to be lacking for patient-care activities making it difficult to capture the information in the database. Also, the variability in the specific content covered in any learning activity involving patients requires some type of classification system adapted to each clerkship.

Contributorship:

·  Larry Young, PhD, Interviewer, designed and negotiated with clerkship directors, presenter

·  Jan Stephens, PhD, interviewer

Dissemination 1: A presentation of this model was made to the Clinical Clerkship Director’s Committee and the Curriculum Committee.

Dissemination 2: Young, L.C. (Year1) Databasing of medical curriculum content. Southern Group on Educational Affairs Year1 Annual Meeting. Augusta, GA.

Dissemination 3: Entry of the majority of the Department of Pediatrics’ clinical core clerkship in the AAMC’s CurrMIT database.

Research Question 4 and 5: Will students in an introduction to clinical medicine course for first-year students perform as well on end-of-course assessments as did students in the old course for second-year students? Will performance be influenced by the specialty of the students’ clinical preceptor?

Investigation: (Year1) Prior to Year1 basic clinical skills were taught to second-year medical students. In Year1 this instruction was moved to the first year and included twice monthly experiences in the offices of community physicians.

Methods: We compared the scores on an objective structured clinical exam (OSCE) of 3 years of second-year medical students with scores of 3 years of first-year medical students. We also investigated whether the OSCE scores of first-year medical students varied by the specialty of the students’ preceptors.

Results & the Impact of Findings: Question 5: The first-year students performed as well as the second-year students, and OSCE scores did not differ across specialty of preceptors. Question 6: Specialty of students’ preceptors did not systematically influence students’ performance on the end-of-course assessment.

Contributorship:

·  Larry Young, PhD and Julie Drew, DPH, equally shared design, data analysis, and preparation and presentation of papers

Dissemination 1: Drew J, Young, L: Comparison of traditional and innovative curricula: Evaluation of students’ performance with a preclinical OSCE. Paper presented at the Predoctoral Education Conference, Society of Teachers of Family Medicine. New Orleans, Louisiana, February, Year1.

Dissemination 2: Drew J, Young, L: Comparison of traditional and innovative curricula. Abstract presented at the Annual Research in Medical Education (RIME) Conference, AAMC. New Orleans, Louisiana, November, Year1.

Dissemination 3: Young, L, Drew J, Olgon J, Chan F: Do students’ perceptions and performance vary by clinical specialty of first-year preceptors? Paper presented at the Annual Pre-doctoral Education Conference, Society of Teachers of Family Medicine. Savannah, Georgia, February, Year1.

Dissemination 4: Young, L, Drew J: Can first-year students master clinical skills? Academic Medicine. 76(10):1065, Year1.

C:\Documents and Settings\kamiddle\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLKE8\ResearchEx2 LarryYoung PhD with bfr edits (2).doc